What we should really be talking about
I recently received an e-mail I thought I'd share with you:
These aren't the words of the Canadian Forces, but rather the words of one soldier. But I would entreat our media and politicians to listen closely to the plaintive tone of this letter, and strive to improve the quality of debate in our country.
Our soldiers deserve better from you.
Dear Mr. Brooks,
First, let me compliment you on the quality of the analysis contained in your blog, as a member of the CF I am impressed by how often you “get it right”. I am even more impressed by your willingness to acknowledge when you don’t understand something well.
This e-mail should stop there, but the truth is as a soldier recently returned from Afghanistan I have been quite disappointed lately by the quality of discussion surrounding the mission. For a while, The Torch was the only place I could find reasonable discussion of the CF mission, however, thanks to some of the links you have posted lately I have learned that there are others who are willing to examine the mission in a reasonable manner.
Thankfully, I have realized yesterday that there is meaningful debate occurring about the mission in Afghanistan, it just isn’t happening on Parliament Hill, or in our newspapers or on our televisions and radios, it is happening on the Internet.
Based on your post-entitled The Principled Left, I think our parliamentarians could take a lesson from you and Terry Glavin. As a soldier who has sworn to defend the democratic values of our society (with my life if necessary) it warms my heart to see two individuals from opposite ends of the political spectrum place their partisan politics aside to support the people of Afghanistan.
What if Afghanistan is a cause that compels us to live up to the rhetoric contained in the International Bill of Human Rights, a UN document which both Canada and the Pre-Taliban government of Afghanistan supported:
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."
We all know the mission is difficult and the costs, financial and human, incredibly high. We know we will make mistakes. We know that non-combatants on both sides will be killed. We know Afghanistan has had a troubled past, and will have a troubled future for some years to come. We know that the Afghans may lie to us, mislead us, and perhaps they may misuse the resources we provide them.
Because something isn’t easy, doesn’t mean that it is wrong. Because there is no immediate answer doesn’t mean we should avoid the question.
If it takes a village to raise a child, what vast level of resources is required to rebuild an entire country?
Afghanistan needs our help, and right now that help includes uniformed troops to maintain and promote security.
The debate about whether or not we should remain in Afghanistan needs to stop and be replaced by more reasoned and educated debate about how best to help the people of Afghanistan. It would be nice to see all three party leaders place their political desires aside and work together to make Canada’s mission in Afghanistan something every Canadian can be proud of.
These aren't the words of the Canadian Forces, but rather the words of one soldier. But I would entreat our media and politicians to listen closely to the plaintive tone of this letter, and strive to improve the quality of debate in our country.
Our soldiers deserve better from you.
posted by Babbling Brooks at 10:37 a.m.
8 Comments:
What this soldier writes is touching and true. I would approve every word, if our mission in Afghanistan could be taken out of context and was in sort of bubble. Canadian soldiers come to help restore democracy, justice and freedom to Afghanistan. But it's not that simple.
How are we to expect the Afghans to ignore that the main foreign army in Afghanistan, the one we are playing second fiddle to, the United States, is the same country which under false pretences, illegally bombed, attacked, destroyed, invaded and occupied Iraq, another Muslim country just separated from Afghanistan by Iran?
How are we to expect the Afghans to ignore that the main foreign army in Afghanistan, the one we are playing second fiddle to, the United States, is threatening and preparing to attack Iran, Afghanistan’s neighbour, a Muslim neighbouring whose border tribes have many affinities? How are we to expect the Afghans to understand the arguments the US draws up against Iran for its nuclear program, when the main regional US ally against the Taliban, Pakistan, has itself obtained a nuclear capacity in similar circumstances and has gone much further than Iran by sharing its nuclear technology with countries like Iran, North Korea and Libya? And yet it’s a strong US ally?
How are we to expect the Afghans to ignore that the main foreign force in Afghanistan, the one we are playing second fiddle to, the United States, is the main military, financial and political backer of Israel, a country that is oppressing, invading, bombing and occupying Palestine and Lebanon? That Canada has now officially and publicly taken Israel’s side in the last Lebanon-Israel conflict does nothing to improve the acceptance of Canadian troops by Afghans.
How are we to expect the Afghans to ignore that one of our main allies in the anti-Taliban fight, Pakistan, is not a democracy, is ruled by a General who came to power through a coup, and who is a known violator of human rights? And this country is helping us install a democracy and the rule of law in Afghanistan while violating these same things in Pakistan?
Is it so hard to understand that for the reasons I have just stated, the Afghans would be just a little suspicious at our real motives for occupying their country? Had all these other things not existed, this soldier’s letter would have been really moving. But in the REAL context, the one I have just described, we have to understand that even the non-Taliban Afghan may not want to support the foreign troops who occupy his country and may want them to leave.
Maybe the soldier who wrote you the nice email is not aware of all these things, and lives in a bubble, but I can assure you that the average Afghan knows all the things I have enumerated and has ample reasons to doubt our motives in Afghanistan, because Canada keeps bad company. That is why I think we should get involved in a theatre where the Americans are not involved in. We would do a better job removed from all these things.
Who's living in a bubble?
The vast majority of Afghans want foreign troops in their country until they can take over their own security. Period.
This tripe from "taxpayer" is exactly, EXACTLY what the soldier was talking about. We need INFORMED debate, rather than politically-motivated talking points.
I'm glad you wrote that. Did you read the Toronto Star article "A good Clip with a full clip" referenced in the "Take out in Afstan" post? Here is part of it:
"Most of the time, though, the Clip goes about its business unmolested, if occasionally the target of impolite gestures from Afghan civilians.
"I've had a few patrols that have been spit at, stones thrown," says Aston. "I've even had an old man out in the middle of the road with a stick hitting our vehicles as we drove by. And a lot of little kids that make hand motions of explosions."
More commonly, children wave and run alongside as the convoy passed through villages.
There's not much interaction between these soldiers and civilians, although they're clearly curious about each other.
"The cultural briefings kind of threw us off," admits Aston of the information sessions conducted for the platoon – drawn largely from reservists with the West Nova Scotia Regiment – before it left Halifax.
"We were told: Don't give the thumbs up sign – because apparently that's offensive to Afghans. But they're using it all over the place."
So, maybe they're being drive-by offensive.
And here's a picture with the "thumbs up" gesture by "Canadian loving kids":
http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2007/05/06/PH2007050600187.jpg
What's your point? That some Afghans don't want us there? NO. WAY. /sarcasm
Even the poll results that I pointed to show that most of the opposition comes from the south, where we happen to operate. But even there, it's close to a 50/50 split.
You want to use anecdotes of kids throwing rocks, I'll point to anecdotes of kids hamming it up for soldiers' cameras or smiling over their new pencils and paper.
But the bottom line is that the majority of the Afghan population want us there for now, and the Government of Afghanistan wants us there for now.
Your anti-Americanism is putrid. You talk about being judged by the company you keep, and yet you would have us side with the Taliban. Your arguments are self-contradictory and puerile.
I'm tired of you. Go away.
Side with the Taliban? That comment, is what putrid is. But I've heard such a comment already, in the house of Commons not too long ago. If people worry about the rights of detainees, you care more about them than of the Canadian troops. You guys are all the same. Either we support the war as it is led, in the current conditions, as an American puppet, or we support the ennemy. So what debate are we to have? The size of the bombs we are to drop? How much to increase the military budget? What new weapons we are to buy for the CF?
Talk about polls. Have you looked at the polls in Canada, in Germany, in Holland, in the UK and in many otehr countries about the war in Afghanistan? Open your eyes and face the truth. I'm sorry if I spoiled your clean and rosy war party
taxpayer: Spelling, spelling, spelling; hop, hop, hop. Ribbit.
Passion without knowledge is like cheese without age.
Good night, good bye and bad luck.
Mark
Ottawa
"How are we to expect the Afghans to ignore that the main foreign force in Afghanistan, the one we are playing second fiddle to, the United States, is the main military, financial and political backer of Israel, a country that is oppressing, invading, bombing and occupying Palestine and Lebanon?"
Let's set aside your propagandist depiction of Palestine and Lebanon for the time being. The Afghans seem to have no problem ignoring the fact that the leading perpetrator of Muslim slaughter during contemporary history has been fellow Muslims. You radical Leftists sure love enabling Muslim xenophobia when it suits you, don't you Taxpayer?
"That is why I think we should get involved in a theatre where the Americans are not involved in. We would do a better job removed from all these things."
Thanks for being so candid about the hard Left's primary criterion for deciding who should be spared from genocide and civil war, and who shouldn't. If Taxpayer had his way, Serbs, Bosnians and Croats would probably still be killing each other.
"Is it so hard to understand that for the reasons I have just stated, the Afghans would be just a little suspicious at our real motives for occupying their country?"
What would our "real motives" be, Taxpayer?. No, let me rephrase that. What do you believe our motives are? I'm sure "real" will have nothing to do with anything you concoct.
"Talk about polls. Have you looked at the polls in Canada, in Germany, in Holland, in the UK and in many otehr countries about the war in Afghanistan? Open your eyes and face the truth."
Okay. The truth is, the polls tell us the western world is largely populated by stupid people, gullible people, people who are too busy with their everyday lives to pay attention to what's going on outside their immediate environment, and dishonest fanatics like you, Taxpayer.
Well done Brooks!
As for "taxpayer" how could he possibly know? Support or opposition to foreign soldiers in Afghanistan is granular at a village and neighbourhood level and has been known to shift from time to time.
Like many debates in Canada Afghanistan has come down to the passionately ignorant blathering on about the talking point de jour and people who are willing to invest the time doing the research. One group, often, sadly, headed by the dopes in Parliament has all the intensity which a complete lack of knowledge allows. The other has the uncertainty and the ability to question which comes from free but diligent inquiry.
There is a certain left right split here with honourable exceptions like Terry Galvin. The left is rather more comfortable with black and white with the underlying principle that if the Americans are for it it must be wrong. Once the principle is understood the facts are rearranged to confirm the truth of that principle. On the right, grey is the predominant colour for no other reason than facts trump blather. Some facts are not convenient - viz the Afghanis treatment of their own captured citizens. But on the right we deal with the facts as best we can. We lack the overarching conceptual theology of anti-Americanism which has propelled generations of our leftist friends.
Which is why your blog is readable and so much of the MSM is not.
Post a Comment
<< Home